Model Number S-60-080-120-P6 |
Device Problems
Patient-Device Incompatibility (2682); Migration (4003)
|
Patient Problem
Embolism/Embolus (4438)
|
Event Date 03/23/2023 |
Event Type
Injury
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
D4: the unique device identifier (udi) is unknown because the part number and lot number were not provided.Manufacturer's investigation is still pending at this time.Results and conclusions will be provided in the final report.
|
|
Event Description
|
Patient id: (b)(6).It was reported that on (b)(6)2022 a supera stent was implanted in the distal popliteal artery to the tibioperoneal trunk.At some point post stent implantation, ultrasound noted an occlusion in the posterior tibial artery.On (b)(6)2023, angiography was performed and noted that the supera stent had migrated.Attempts were made to pass a wire through the migrated stent, but attempts were unsuccessful.It was decided that since there was brisk in-line flow through the anterior tibial artery (ata) and since the patient's wounds were healing, no revascularization intervention in the pta would be performed.No additional information was provided.
|
|
Event Description
|
Subsequent to the initial medwatch report, the following information was received: it was reported that at the time of deployment, the supera stent was thought to be well apposed to the vessel wall, but since the stent migrated, the cause of the migration may possibly be due to stent under-sizing that was not noted at the time of implantation.Additionally, it is unlikely that the supera stent, which migrated from the site of implantation (distal popliteal to tibioperoneal trunk) to the anterior tibial artery (ata) caused or contributed to the lower limb arterial occlusion as there was brisk arterial flow noted through the ata.The occlusion was noted in the posterior tibial artery (pta) due to progression of disease and restenosis in the area.No additional information was provided.
|
|
Manufacturer Narrative
|
The device was not returned for analysis.A review of the lot history record identified no manufacturing nonconformities issued to the reported lot that would have contributed to this event.Additionally, a review of the complaint history identified no other similar incidents from this lot.The reported patient effect of embolism is listed in the supera peripheral stent system instructions for use instructions for use (ifu) as a potential adverse event.It is possible that during initial deployment the diameter of the stent used was inadvertently undersized for the size of the vessel; thus resulting in the reported patient-device incompatibility wall apposition and ultimately resulted in the reported stent migration; however this cannot be confirmed.The investigation determined a conclusive cause for the reported difficulties cannot be determined.Additionally, the reported difficulties possibly contributed to the reported patient effect; however a conclusive cause for the reported patient effect, and the relationship to the product, if any, cannot be determined.However, the treatments appears to be related to the operational context of the procedure.There is no indication of a product quality issue with respect to manufacture, design or labeling.
|
|
Search Alerts/Recalls
|
|